- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 08:27:57 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 21/07/11 01:08, Ian Davis wrote: > We recognise that "graph" has subtly different semantics > between sparql and rdf concepts so let's avoid that term. It would be helpful to if you could point to text in the SPARQL specs that leads to that conclusion. It should be changed because a graph is value and used as such in SPARQL, both in query and update. As such , the changes are editorial and not a cause for a SPARQL second last call. In SPARQL Update, a graph store is like an "integer store" - a number of slots (g-boxes) which can change. The term was invented to differentiate between the mutable container "graph store", and compound, immutable value, RDF dataset which is a mathematical set as you note. Had the SPARQL update document defined update to work on a dataset, then there would be problems but it doesn't. """ Definition: Graph Store A Graph Store GS is a mutable container of RDF graphs. """ stresses it is the container that is mutable. Let's get the text right while we can. Andy PS It would be useful to define terminology in RDF to cover IRIs/bnodes/literals. SPARQL 1.0 added "RDF Term" for this. RDF concepts has "nodes" but that is for the nodes of a graph, do does not capture the notion of what goes in a slot in a triple.
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 07:28:28 UTC